The therapeutic use of organ transplants, including bone marrow transplants, has steadily increased since its early beginnings. It has become an important therapeutic option for a number of diseases, including, but not limited to, hematologic, immunologic, and malignant disorders.
Unfortunately, the therapeutic uses of transplantation often are complicated, rendered ineffectual, or precluded by adverse immune responses engendered by the transplant. Among the most prominent adverse reactions encountered as a result of transplant therapies are (i) the host versus graft response (“HVG”) (rejection of the transplant by an immune competent host), and (ii) graft versus host disease (“GVHD”) (processes that occur primarily in an immunocompromised host when it is recognized as non-self by immunocompetent cells of a graft).
Graft rejection in a host can be avoided, of course, by perfectly matching the donor and the host. Except for autologous tissue, however, only identical twins might be expected to be truly syngeneic. Perfect matches between an individual donor and another individual host/recipient are virtually non-existent. Thus, the use of autologous tissue is the only other way to make a perfect match. Unfortunately, the host tissue is typically not suitable or was not isolated in advance of need. Frequently the need for the transplant therapy is, in fact, to replace damaged tissue in the host. The use of syngeneic tissue, therefore, while an effective solution to the problems of adverse host response to graft tissue, is not generally useful in practical applications.
If syngeneic matching is not possible, the adverse immune effects that arise in transplant therapies can be mitigated by matching an allogeneic donor and host as closely as possible. Blood and/or tissue typing is used to match donors and hosts to provide the highest likelihood of therapeutic success. Even the closest matching of allogeneic tissue, however, does not prevent serious HVG, and, accordingly, transplant therapies involve the use of immunosuppression and immunosuppressive drugs, as discussed below.
Another approach to avoid the complications of HVG in transplant therapies has been to disable the immune system of the recipient host. This has been accomplished by using radiation therapy, and/or immunosuppressive chemotherapy, and/or antibody therapy. The resulting suppression of host immune responses often quite effectively aids establishment of the graft (such as bone marrow) in the host. However, immunoablation or suppression compromises the host's immune defenses. This results in the host becoming all too readily susceptible to infections after even minor exposure to infectious agents. The resulting infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality among transplant patients.
Compromising the host immune system also engenders or exacerbates another serious problem encountered in transplant therapies—graft versus host disease (“GVHD”). GVHD occurs when donor tissue contains immunocompetent cells that recognize MHC proteins of the recipient as non-self. This activates the T-cells, and they secrete cytokines, such as IL-2 (interleukin 2), IFNγ (interferon gamma), and TNFα (tumor necrosis factor alpha). These signals trigger an immune attack on recipient targets including the skin, GI tract, liver, and lymphoid organs (Ferrara and Deeg, 1991). GVHD is particularly a problem in bone marrow transplants, where it has been shown to be mediated primarily by T lymphocytes (Grebe and Streilein, 1976). In fact, approximately 50% of bone marrow transplant patients develop acute GVHD. Many of these patients die (from 15% to 45%).
There are also other immune system dysfunctions, disorders, and diseases that arise as primary pathologies and as secondary effects of other pathologies and/or treatments thereof. These include neoplasms, pathologies of the bone marrow, pathologies of the blood, autoimmune disorders, and some inflammatory disorders, as discussed further below. Primary and adjunctive therapy for these disorders and diseases, like primary and adjunctive therapies for HVG and GVHD, often involve the use of immunosuppressive drugs. All of the current therapies have disadvantages and side effects.
Immunosuppressant Drugs
A good deal of effort has been directed to developing drugs to treat these immune system dysfunctions to ameliorate or eliminate their deleterious effects, without causing additional harmful side effects. There has been some progress toward this goal, and a number of drugs have been developed and are in use to prevent and/or treat these dysfunctions. The introduction of the more effective of these drugs marked a great advance in the medical practice of transplant therapies; but, none are ideal. Indeed, none of the immunosuppressive drugs currently available for clinical use in transplant therapies are entirely effective. All of the drugs have serious drawbacks and deleterious side effects, as summarized briefly below. For review see Farag (2004), “Chronic graft-versus-host disease: where do we go from here?,” Bone Marrow Transplantation 33: 569-577.
Corticosteroids, which are used primarily to treat inflammation and inflammatory diseases, are known to be immunosuppressive and are considered by many to be the best primary treatment for HVG and GVHD. They inhibit T-cell proliferation and T-cell dependent immune responses, at least in part, by inhibiting the expression of certain cytokine genes involved in T-cell activation and T-cell dependent immune response.
Cyclosporin is among the most frequently used drugs for immune suppression and the prevention of HVG and GVHD. It is strongly immunosuppressive in general. Although it can be effective in reducing adverse immune reactions in transplant patients, it also weakens the immune system so much that patients are left highly vulnerable to infections. Consequently, patients are much more easily infected by exposure pathogens, and have little capacity to mount an effective immune response to infections. Even mild pathogens then can be life-threatening. Cyclosporin also causes a variety of other undesirable side effects.
Methotrexate is also widely used in the prophylaxis and treatment of HVG and GVHD, by itself or in combination with other drugs. Studies have shown that, if it is effective at all, it is apparently less effective than cyclosporin. As with cyclosporin, methotrexate causes a variety of side effects, some of which can be deleterious to patient health.
FK-506 is a macrolide-like compound. Similar to cyclosporin, it is derived from fungal sources. The immunosuppressive effects of cyclosporin and FK-506 are similar. They block early events of T-cell activation by forming a heterodimeric complex with their respective cytoplasmic receptor proteins (i.e., cyclophilin and FK-binding protein). This then inhibits the phosphatase activity of calcineurin, thereby ultimately inhibiting the expression of nuclear regulatory proteins and T-cell activation genes.
Other drugs that have been used for immunosuppression include antithymocyte globulin, azathioprine, and cyclophosphamide. They have not proven to be advantageous. Rapamycin, another macrolide-like compound which interferes with the response of T-cells to IL-2, also has been used to block T-cell activated immune response. RS-61443, a derivative of mycophenolic acid, has been found to inhibit allograft rejection in experimental animals. Mizoribine, an imidazole nucleoside, blocks the purine biosynthetic pathway and inhibits mitogen stimulated T- and B-cell proliferation in a manner similar to azathioprine and RS-61443. Deoxyspergualin, a synthetic analog of spergualin, has been found to exert immunosuppressive properties in pre-clinical transplantation models. The anti-metabolite brequinar sodium is an inhibitor of dihydro-orotate dehydrogenase and blocks formation of the nucleotides uridine and cytidine via inhibition of pyrimidine synthesis. Berberine and its pharmacologically tolerable salts have been used as an immunosuppressant for treating autoimmune diseases such as rheumatism, for treating allergies, and for preventing graft rejection. It has been reported that berberine inhibits B-cell antibody production and generally suppresses humoral immune responses, but does not affect T-cell propagation. See Japanese Patent 07-316051 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,245,781.
None of these immunosuppressive drugs, whether used alone or in combination with other agents, are fully effective. All of them generally leave patients still susceptible to HVG and GVHD and weaken their ability to defend against infection. This renders them much more susceptible to infection and much less able to fight off infections when they do occur. Furthermore, all of these drugs cause serious side effects, including, for instance, gastrointestinal toxicity, nephrotoxicity, hypertension, myelosuppression, hepatotoxicity, hypertension, and gum hypertrophy, among others. None of them have proven to be a fully acceptable or effective treatment. In sum, given these drawbacks, there is at present no entirely satisfactory pharmaceutically based treatment for adverse immune system dysfunction and/or responses such as HVG and GVHD.
It has long been thought that a more specific type of immune suppression might be developed without these drawbacks. For example, an agent that suppressed or eliminated alloreactive T-cells, specifically, would be effective against HVG and GVHD (at least for allogeneic grafts) without the deleterious side effects that occur with agents that globally attack and compromise the immune system. However, as yet, no such agent(s) have been developed.
Use of Restricted Stem Cells in Transplantation
The use of stem cells in lieu of or together with immunosuppressive agents has recently attracted interest. There have been some encouraging observations in this area. A variety of stem cells have been isolated and characterized in recent years. They range from those of highly restricted differentiation potential and limited ability to grow in culture to those with apparently unrestricted differentiation potential and unlimited ability to grow in culture. The former have generally been the easier to derive and can be obtained from a variety of adult tissues. The latter have had to be derived from germ cells and embryos, and are called embryonal stem (“ES”) cells, embryonal germ (“EG”) cells, and germ cells. The embryonal stem (“ES”) cell has unlimited self-renewal and can differentiate into all tissue types. ES cells are derived from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst. Embryonal germ (“EG”) cells are derived from primordial germ cells of a post-implantation embryo. Stem cells derived from adult tissue have been of limited value because they are immunogenic, have limited differentiation potential, and have limited ability to propagate in culture. ES, EG, and germ cells do not suffer from these disadvantages, but they have a marked propensity to form teratomas in allogeneic hosts, raising due concern for their use in medical treatments. For this reason, there is pessimism about their utility in clinical applications, despite their advantageously broad differentiation potential. Stem cells derived from embryos also are subject to ethical controversies that may impede their use in treating disease.
Some efforts to find an alternative to ES, EG, and germ cells have focused on cells derived from adult tissue. While adult stem cells have been identified in most tissues of mammals, their differentiation potential is restricted and considerably more narrow than that of ES, EG, and germ cells. Indeed many such cells can give rise only to one or a few differentiated cell types, and many others are restricted to a single embryonic lineage.
For instance, hematopoietic stem cells can differentiate only to form cells of the hematopoietic lineage, neural stem cells differentiate into cells only of neuroectodermal origin, and mesenchymal stem cells (“MSCs”) are limited to cells of mesenchymal origin. For the reasons noted above regarding the limitations, risks, and controversies of and relating to ES, EG, and germ cells, a substantial portion of work on the use of stem cells in transplantation therapies has utilized MSCs. Results of the last few years appear to show that allografts of MSCs do not engender a HVG immune reaction, which is a response invariably seen when other tissue is transplanted between allogeneic individuals. Moreover, the results suggest that MSCs weaken lymphocyte immune response, at least in some circumstances.
While these results immediately suggest that MSCs might be useful to decrease HVG and/or GVHD that ordinarily would accompany allogeneic transplantation, the observed immunosuppressive effects of MSCs were highly dose dependent, and relatively high doses were required to observe an immunosuppressive effect. In fact, decreased proliferation of lymphocytes in mixed lymphocyte assays in vitro was “marked” only at or above a 1:10 ratio of MSCs to lymphocytes. Furthermore, the observed inhibitory effect decreased and became unobservable as the dose of MSCs decreased, and at ratios below 1:100 the presence of MSCs actually seemed to stimulate proliferation of the T-cells. The same dose effects also were observed in mitogen-stimulated lymphocyte proliferation assays. See, for review, Ryan et al. (2005) “Mesenchymal stem cells avoid allogeneic rejection,” J. Inflammation 2: 8; Le Blanc (2003) “Immunomodulatory effects of fetal and adult mesenchymal stem cells,” Cytotherapy 5(6): 485-489, and Jorgensen et al. (2003) “Engineering mesenchymal stem cells for immunotherapy,” Gene Therapy 10: 928-931. Additional results are summarized below.
For example, Bartholomew and co-workers found that baboon MSCs did not stimulate allogeneic lymphocytes to proliferate in vitro and that MSCs reduced proliferation of mitogen-stimulated lymphocytes by more than 50% in mixed lymphocyte assays in vitro. They further showed that administration of MSCs in vivo prolonged skin graft survival (relative to controls). Both the in vitro results and the in vivo results required a high dose of MSCs:1:1 ratio with the lymphocytes for the in vitro results. The amount of MSCs that would be required to approach such a ratio in vivo in humans may be too high to achieve, as a practical matter. This may limit the utility of MSCs. See Bartholomew et al. (2002): “Mesenchymal stem cells suppress lymphocyte proliferation in vitro and prolong skin graft survival in vivo,” Experimental Hematology 30: 42-48.
Maitra and co-workers examined the effects of human MSCs on engraftment of allogeneic human umbilical cord blood cells after co-infusion into sub-lethally irradiated NOD-SCID mice. They found that human MSCs promoted engraftment and did not activate allogeneic T-cells in in vitro proliferation assays. They also found that human MSCs suppressed in vitro activation of allogeneic human T-cells by mitogens. The effects were dose dependent and relatively high ratios were required for suppression. (Maitra et al. (2004) Bone Marrow Transplantation 33: 597-604.)
Recently, Le Blanc and co-workers reported successfully treating one patient with Grade IV acute GVHD, which usually is fatal, by administration of “third party haploidentical” MSCs. The patient was a 9-year old boy with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, which was in its third remission. Initially, the patient was treated with radiation and cyclophophamide and then given blood cells that were identical to his own cells at the HLA-A, HLA-B, and HLA-DRbetal loci. These had been obtained from an unrelated female donor. Despite aggressive treatment, including dosing with a variety of immunosuppressants, by 70 days after transplant the patient developed Grade IV acute GVHD. He was frequently afflicted by invasive bacterial, viral, and fungal infections.
Under these clearly dire circumstances, an alternative blood stem cell transplant was attempted. Haploidentical MSCs were isolated from the patient's mother and expanded in vitro for three weeks. The cells were harvested and 2×106 cells per kilogram were administered to the patient intravenously. There were no signs of toxicity associated with the MSCs, nor were there substantial side effects. Many symptoms resolved within a few days after the transplant; but, residual disease was apparent. After several additional intravenous injections of MSCs using the same methods, the patient's symptoms and GVHD were fully resolved. The patient was still disease free one year after discharge. According to the authors, in their experience, this patient is unique in surviving GVHD of this severity. The results reported by Le Blanc et al. are both promising and inspiring, and should be a spur to developing effective therapies that utilize stem cells. Le Blanc et al. (2004) “Treatment of severe acute graft-versus-host disease with third party haploidentical mesenchymal stem cells,” Lancet 363: 1439-41.
Nevertheless, these results, including those of Le Blanc and co-workers, reveal potential shortcomings of MSCs. The cells need to be administered with traditional immunosuppressive modalities which then will continue to engender deleterious immune responses. The dosing requirements for MSCs apparently will need to be very high to be effective, which will incur greater cost, more difficulty in administration, greater risk of toxicity and other harmful side effects, and other disadvantages.
In view of these limitations of current stem cell based transplantation-related therapies, there is clearly a strong need for progenitor cells that can be used for all—or at least most—recipient hosts without necessitating a host-recipient haplotype match. Further, there is a need for cells of greater “specific activity” so that they are therapeutically effective at lower doses and their administration does not pose the problems associated with the high dosing regimens required for beneficial results using MSCs. And, there is a need for cells that have essentially unlimited differentiation potential to form cells that occur in the organism of interest.
Accordingly, there has been a need for cells that have the self-renewing and differentiation capacity of ES, EG, and germ cells but are not immunogenic; do not form teratomas when allografted or xenografted to a host; do not pose other safety issues associated with ES, EG, and germ cells; retain the other advantages of ES, EG, and germ cells; are easy to isolate from readily available sources, such as placenta, umbilical cord, umbilical cord blood, blood, and bone marrow; can be stored safely for extended periods; can be obtained easily and without risk to volunteers, donors or patients, and others giving consent; and do not entail the technical and logistical difficulties involved in obtaining and working with ES, EG, and germ cells.
Recently, a type of cell, called herein multipotent adult progenitor cells (“MAPCs”), has been isolated and characterized (see, for instance, U.S. Pat. No. 7,015,037, which is herein incorporated by reference in its entirety). (“MAPCs” also may be referred to as “MASCs.”) These cells provide many of the advantages of ES, EG, and germ cells without many of their drawbacks. For example, MAPCs are capable of indefinite culture without loss of their differentiation potential. They show efficient, long term engraftment and differentiation along multiple developmental lineages in NOD-SCID mice and do so without evidence of teratoma formation (often seen with ES, EG, and germ cells) (Reyes, M. and C. M. Verfaillie (2001) Ann N Y Acad. Sci. 938: 231-5).